Cineform for the MAC (Final Cut) - Join me in sending feedback to Apple at DVinfo.net

Geoff Murillo · November 3rd, 2006, 09:24 PM

Hi Everyone,

I don't know which forum this should go under as it includes both Cineform and Final Cut.

I am a new MAC owner who has previously worked with Cineform on a PC. The Cineform codec, as a lossless editing and delivery codec is bar none the best I've work with - High quality clips with smaller file sizes than uncompressed files. I miss Cineform's HDLink and their codec's quality. There's nothing like it on the MAC.

Having a Quicktime Version of Cineform with software based acceleration would be a tremendous win for Final Cut Editors. As well as potentially add cross-platform compatability (PC to MAC or MAC to PC) and add compatibility with other applications like Combustion.

Please join me in sending feedback requests to Apple, asking them to support Cineform within Final Cut and Quicktime.

Here's the link:

http://www.apple.com/feedback/finalcutpro.html

-Geoff Murillo

Geoff Murillo · November 3rd, 2006, 11:06 PM

And please let me know (reply to this post) if you have sent a feedback request to Apple. Let's keep this post active until Apple decides to support Cineform. Cineform will benefit everyone editing on a MAC.

Thanks,

Geoff Murillo

Geoff Murillo · November 4th, 2006, 01:23 AM

Please, even if you are a PC-only editor, send a support request to Apple. And respond to this thread. Apple Cineform Quicktime support will be a bridge between the gap of the PC an MAC users. When it comes down to it, we are all film makers. Cineform is an amazing tool for Post Production. Please be a part of this cross-platform solution. Please send feedback to MAC and respond to this thread. Let's all make this a reality, together.

Thank you,

Geoff Murillo

Jonathan Plotkin · November 4th, 2006, 07:53 AM

Which "application area" should you use for the feedback - format support or export/output?

JP

Geoff Murillo · November 4th, 2006, 12:26 PM

Hi Jonathan,

You could enter it under Capture/Import, Format Support, Editing, Export/Output, Integration with Final Cut Studio, or Integration with other applications.

Thanks,

Geoff Murillo

Pete Bauer · November 4th, 2006, 01:53 PM

I'm not a Mac user, so forgive my ignorance...wouldn't it be better to ask Cineform to work on an Apple-compatible version of their codec and software than to ask Apple to license and incorporate Cineform technology into it's software? That's how it would work in the PC arena.

Or is it the classical Apple paradigm of products being designed to keep third parties out of the party (that is to say, proprietary and exclusive), so Cineform wouldn't be able to develop for the Mac without Apple's direct involvement? But, I thought the Cineform guys had given some subtle hints in the recent past that they do have Mac support in the works...is that true, or no?

Just to clarify, Cineform isn't and doesn't claim to be mathematically lossless, but "visually lossless" for quite a few rendering generations. For us end-users, it is for all practical purposes the same; just didn't want anyone to go off on that technicality.

Geoff Murillo · November 4th, 2006, 05:49 PM

Hi Pete,

Asking for Apple to support Cineform is necessary so that Apple can work on allowing third party codec developers like Cineform, to work seemlessly within Final Cut's RT engine.

I know that Cineform is working on a Quicktime version. If Apple decides to add RT support to Cineform or other third party software within Final Cut it would ultimately add greater value to their product.

And you are right, Cineform does use the term "visually lossless".

Thanks,

Geoff Murillo

Todd Giglio · November 30th, 2006, 08:38 AM

I sent feedback too. It seems like Cineform would be a perfect match to FCP. Hopefully we'll see this soon.

Todd

Chuck Spaulding · December 2nd, 2006, 01:54 PM

I am a strong user and supporter of Cineform, recently however I have been asked to work on a project with two other FCP editors and agreed for the sake of compatability to edit with FCP.

They have HD and HDV source footage and I cannot believe the hoops they have to jump through and the amount of rendering required. This is so easy to accomplish with Cineform's digital intermediate, in realtime with no rendering.

I have been searching all morning looking for a comparable product on the Mac and don't understand why if FCP is as popular that a Cineform type of digital intermediate doesn't exist.

Honestly, this is not a PC versus Mac or FCP vs anything else, its just that with Cineform I capture source footage from a JVC JY100, Sony FX1 and HC1 and SDI-HD from any source, all the same way and edit in realtime. I had no idea the pain that FCP users where going through to accomplish this.

What am I missing? Is there a simple way to ingest HD and HDV and edit them in a common format? There must be, if not I can't imagine why Apple wouldn't be all over Cineform.

Nate Weaver · December 2nd, 2006, 02:40 PM

There are other intermediates available.

The real problem with FCP is lack of an open timeline, where you can use multiple framerates and codecs concurrently in one sequence. You can do that now, but the clips that don't match codec/framerate play in RT poorly and have to be rendered.

There are two intermediate codecs used in the FCP world:

-Apple Intermediate Codec, used to smooth out the early days of HDV and still in use by some. It works at any frame size and framerate, pretty much. You can only digitize to it in realtime via HDV camera, not by Kona or Blackmagic card.

-DVCPRO HD, which can be digitized to by both Decklink and Kona cards in HD, in real time. It's not as clean as Cineform, I imagine, but it's very handy.

So there are intermediates available and in use, and this is the main reason there's less of a market for Cineform on FCP. DVCPRO HD codec is distributed with FCP and available to all Quicktime applications.

If the people you're working with aren't working this way, they might have their reasons, or they just don't know.

P.S. Editing native HDV is pretty easy in FCP if your machine is up to snuff (and a lot are). Doing so correctly can avoid recompressing the MPEG2 material (to another gen of MPEG2) and makes HDV look MUCH better. This might be at play also.

Chuck Spaulding · December 2nd, 2006, 04:00 PM

The guys that I would be working with seem to be very knowledgeable about Macs and FCP, that's not to say that they know about all of the options avaliable to them. I had one of them go through their workflow with me and do a small test working with HDV natively, they're on the latest dual 2.5GHz G5's.

Doing the actual editing seemed a bit teadeous compared to what I'm used to, however it wasn't all that objectionable. I'm sure part of that was my own bias to the way I currently do things. But when it came to outputting for an SD DVD the render time was painfully slow. It reminded me of the old days in 3D, set up your scene hit the render button and go home and hope for the best.

Cineform has two products, AspectHD for capturing via firewire and ProspectHD to capture SDI-HD using a Kona or Blackmagic card. It sounds like the Apple Intermediate Codec is similar to AspectHD. Have you used it? If so, how was the quality. Is Aplle still developing this Codec? I'm not a big fan trying to edit HDV natively with any NLE on either platform.

Does Mirranda or anyone else have products that convert HD to something like DVCProHD or the Apple Digital Intermediate?

Nate Weaver · December 2nd, 2006, 05:31 PM

Most people who are using mixed acquisition formats are working in DVCPRO HD with FCP. It's fast, easy on the CPU, etc etc.

All you need is a $400 Decklink card to get the same functionality as Prospect HD, I believe, albeit with a codec that isn't quite as high quality as Cineform. But good enough, generally.

Apple's philosophy generally with FCP seems to be:

"All digital video cameras shoot a data stream. If there's a conduit that allows us to work with that native data, our ideal is to have you edit with that native data. Transcoding is a compromise. Decklink/Kona and DVCPRO HD handle everything else."

I honestly agree, personally.

November 3rd, 2006, 09:24 PM	#1
Geoff Murillo Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Glendale, CA Posts: 92	Need Cineform for the MAC (Final Cut) - Join me in sending feedback to Apple Hi Everyone, I don't know which forum this should go under as it includes both Cineform and Final Cut. I am a new MAC owner who has previously worked with Cineform on a PC. The Cineform codec, as a lossless editing and delivery codec is bar none the best I've work with - High quality clips with smaller file sizes than uncompressed files. I miss Cineform's HDLink and their codec's quality. There's nothing like it on the MAC. Having a Quicktime Version of Cineform with software based acceleration would be a tremendous win for Final Cut Editors. As well as potentially add cross-platform compatability (PC to MAC or MAC to PC) and add compatibility with other applications like Combustion. Please join me in sending feedback requests to Apple, asking them to support Cineform within Final Cut and Quicktime. Here's the link: http://www.apple.com/feedback/finalcutpro.html -Geoff Murillo Last edited by Geoff Murillo; November 3rd, 2006 at 10:05 PM.

November 3rd, 2006, 11:06 PM	#2
Geoff Murillo Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Glendale, CA Posts: 92	Need Cineform for the MAC (Final Cut) - Join me in sending feedback to Apple And please let me know (reply to this post) if you have sent a feedback request to Apple. Let's keep this post active until Apple decides to support Cineform. Cineform will benefit everyone editing on a MAC. Thanks, Geoff Murillo Last edited by Geoff Murillo; November 4th, 2006 at 12:20 AM.

November 4th, 2006, 01:53 PM	#6
Pete Bauer Wrangler Join Date: May 2003 Location: Eagle River, AK Posts: 4,100	I'm not a Mac user, so forgive my ignorance...wouldn't it be better to ask Cineform to work on an Apple-compatible version of their codec and software than to ask Apple to license and incorporate Cineform technology into it's software? That's how it would work in the PC arena. Or is it the classical Apple paradigm of products being designed to keep third parties out of the party (that is to say, proprietary and exclusive), so Cineform wouldn't be able to develop for the Mac without Apple's direct involvement? But, I thought the Cineform guys had given some subtle hints in the recent past that they do have Mac support in the works...is that true, or no? Just to clarify, Cineform isn't and doesn't claim to be mathematically lossless, but "visually lossless" for quite a few rendering generations. For us end-users, it is for all practical purposes the same; just didn't want anyone to go off on that technicality. __________________ Pete Bauer The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and science. Albert Einstein Trying to solve a DV mystery? You may find the answer behind the SEARCH function ... or be able to join a discussion already in progress!

December 2nd, 2006, 02:40 PM	#10
Nate Weaver Wrangler Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 2,100	There are other intermediates available. The real problem with FCP is lack of an open timeline, where you can use multiple framerates and codecs concurrently in one sequence. You can do that now, but the clips that don't match codec/framerate play in RT poorly and have to be rendered. There are two intermediate codecs used in the FCP world: -Apple Intermediate Codec, used to smooth out the early days of HDV and still in use by some. It works at any frame size and framerate, pretty much. You can only digitize to it in realtime via HDV camera, not by Kona or Blackmagic card. -DVCPRO HD, which can be digitized to by both Decklink and Kona cards in HD, in real time. It's not as clean as Cineform, I imagine, but it's very handy. So there are intermediates available and in use, and this is the main reason there's less of a market for Cineform on FCP. DVCPRO HD codec is distributed with FCP and available to all Quicktime applications. If the people you're working with aren't working this way, they might have their reasons, or they just don't know. P.S. Editing native HDV is pretty easy in FCP if your machine is up to snuff (and a lot are). Doing so correctly can avoid recompressing the MPEG2 material (to another gen of MPEG2) and makes HDV look MUCH better. This might be at play also. __________________ My Work: nateweaver.net

December 2nd, 2006, 05:31 PM	#12
Nate Weaver Wrangler Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 2,100	Most people who are using mixed acquisition formats are working in DVCPRO HD with FCP. It's fast, easy on the CPU, etc etc. All you need is a $400 Decklink card to get the same functionality as Prospect HD, I believe, albeit with a codec that isn't quite as high quality as Cineform. But good enough, generally. Apple's philosophy generally with FCP seems to be: "All digital video cameras shoot a data stream. If there's a conduit that allows us to work with that native data, our ideal is to have you edit with that native data. Transcoding is a compromise. Decklink/Kona and DVCPRO HD handle everything else." I honestly agree, personally. __________________ My Work: nateweaver.net

November 4th, 2006, 01:23 AM	#3
Geoff Murillo Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Glendale, CA Posts: 92	Please, even if you are a PC-only editor, send a support request to Apple. And respond to this thread. Apple Cineform Quicktime support will be a bridge between the gap of the PC an MAC users. When it comes down to it, we are all film makers. Cineform is an amazing tool for Post Production. Please be a part of this cross-platform solution. Please send feedback to MAC and respond to this thread. Let's all make this a reality, together. Thank you, Geoff Murillo

November 4th, 2006, 07:53 AM	#4
Jonathan Plotkin Regular Crew Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Ithaca, NY Posts: 122	Which "application area" should you use for the feedback - format support or export/output? JP

November 4th, 2006, 12:26 PM	#5
Geoff Murillo Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Glendale, CA Posts: 92	Hi Jonathan, You could enter it under Capture/Import, Format Support, Editing, Export/Output, Integration with Final Cut Studio, or Integration with other applications. Thanks, Geoff Murillo

November 4th, 2006, 05:49 PM	#7
Geoff Murillo Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Glendale, CA Posts: 92	Hi Pete, Asking for Apple to support Cineform is necessary so that Apple can work on allowing third party codec developers like Cineform, to work seemlessly within Final Cut's RT engine. I know that Cineform is working on a Quicktime version. If Apple decides to add RT support to Cineform or other third party software within Final Cut it would ultimately add greater value to their product. And you are right, Cineform does use the term "visually lossless". Thanks, Geoff Murillo

November 30th, 2006, 08:38 AM	#8
Todd Giglio Major Player Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 265	I sent feedback too. It seems like Cineform would be a perfect match to FCP. Hopefully we'll see this soon. Todd

December 2nd, 2006, 01:54 PM	#9
Chuck Spaulding Trustee Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Thousand Oaks Posts: 1,104	I am a strong user and supporter of Cineform, recently however I have been asked to work on a project with two other FCP editors and agreed for the sake of compatability to edit with FCP. They have HD and HDV source footage and I cannot believe the hoops they have to jump through and the amount of rendering required. This is so easy to accomplish with Cineform's digital intermediate, in realtime with no rendering. I have been searching all morning looking for a comparable product on the Mac and don't understand why if FCP is as popular that a Cineform type of digital intermediate doesn't exist. Honestly, this is not a PC versus Mac or FCP vs anything else, its just that with Cineform I capture source footage from a JVC JY100, Sony FX1 and HC1 and SDI-HD from any source, all the same way and edit in realtime. I had no idea the pain that FCP users where going through to accomplish this. What am I missing? Is there a simple way to ingest HD and HDV and edit them in a common format? There must be, if not I can't imagine why Apple wouldn't be all over Cineform.

December 2nd, 2006, 04:00 PM	#11
Chuck Spaulding Trustee Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Thousand Oaks Posts: 1,104	The guys that I would be working with seem to be very knowledgeable about Macs and FCP, that's not to say that they know about all of the options avaliable to them. I had one of them go through their workflow with me and do a small test working with HDV natively, they're on the latest dual 2.5GHz G5's. Doing the actual editing seemed a bit teadeous compared to what I'm used to, however it wasn't all that objectionable. I'm sure part of that was my own bias to the way I currently do things. But when it came to outputting for an SD DVD the render time was painfully slow. It reminded me of the old days in 3D, set up your scene hit the render button and go home and hope for the best. Cineform has two products, AspectHD for capturing via firewire and ProspectHD to capture SDI-HD using a Kona or Blackmagic card. It sounds like the Apple Intermediate Codec is similar to AspectHD. Have you used it? If so, how was the quality. Is Aplle still developing this Codec? I'm not a big fan trying to edit HDV natively with any NLE on either platform. Does Mirranda or anyone else have products that convert HD to something like DVCProHD or the Apple Digital Intermediate?